The Boston Massacre

Boston, Massachusets, a hot-bed for revolutionary thought that had been under military British occupation after the response it gave towards the newly enacted stamp act. Merchants boycotted British goods, and troops were sent by the British in 1768 to impose order and enforce the law after complaints from customs officers. The city had a high unemployment rate, young men were idle and poverty was rising. After the arrival of British soldiers in October of the aforementioned year, tensions only escalated and it was just a matter of time for something bad to happen. It was common for redcoats to get harassed by the colonists, and numerous scrimmages and scuffles ensued, seeing as they were 1/3 of the men in the colony.

But in March of 1770, an event occurred in the Boston Manufactory House that would “set the foundation for American Independence” (John Adams). This place was a sanctuary for the ill, poor, and homeless people of the colony, and the British ordered the removal of all occupants so their redcoats could be garrisoned there. The people of the house resisted, and the British backed off, but it did not end there. On March 5th, a mob of angry townspeople encircled a British Sentry, throwing rocks and sticks and shouting insults at them. Some of the redcoats opened fire against the mob, which ended up killing five colonists and wounding several others. After this, those who passed away during this confrontation were martyrized by the newspapers. An image was drawn by Henry Pelham and circulated by Paul Revere in the Boston Gazette that depicted the massacre, and engulfed the people in anti-British hate and anger. A fair trial was given to the redcoats, and John Adams decided to be in their defense even though he was a revolutionary. This only so it could be fair, and that there would be no pretext for further British retaliation.

The Boston Massacre proved to the colonists the corruption of standing armies led by tyrannical British and inflamed revolutionary spirit amongst the colonists.

The Townshend Acts and the committees of correspondence

The British colonies in North America were self-ruled entities that had been neglected for years by the English government. At every turn, the British sought only to impose tighter controls over them without giving anything in return. British law wasnʻt enforced in the colonies, neither were trade regulations or anything of the sort in the 1600s and early 1700s. This led to the colonists developing the mindset that even though they were English by right, they were also American and had to watch out for anyone to hinder their own way of living. The Crown was desperate for money, this being a result of the Seven Yearsʻ War which hindered its finances drastically, doubling the amount of debt the country as a whole had.

The Stamp Act (1765) imposed on the colonies caused an uproar, as it levied a tax on all printed goods produced in the colony to pay for the debt and surplus of British troops left in North America after the war. This did not last long, as the colonists protested and assembled against this act, demanding it is removed which it did in March of the following year. Seeing as they could not tame the colonies, the British passed The Declaratory Act, which asserted Britain’s ultimate right of control over the colonies. The colonists did not heed the meaning of this until the British started enforcing the act. In 1767, Charles Townshend, Britain’s chancellor of the exchequer, imposed a series of new taxes designed to raise revenue.

All imports of glass, lead, paint, and tea were to be taxed, new customs officials were to be sent to the colonies to collect, and courts of admiralty were created to prosecute violators and smugglers. These actions became known as the Townshend Acts, and they unleashed another wave of protest in the colonies. History repeated itself once again, and a fierce debate over whether the British parliament could just impose a tax on the colonies just for the sole purpose of raising revenue. According to the colonists, only colonial assemblies elected by themselves should have the power to impose taxes. The colonial assemblies of New York and Massachusets denied the imposition of taxes and the idea of “Virtual representation”, but were then dissolved by the British and replaced with appointed governors.

This led to even more uproar, and colonists started boycotting English goods to pressure Parliament into repealing the act. Protests and violent demonstration also occurred during this time period. Merchants in Boston signed a nonimportation agreement, which suspended all imports of British goods. Merchants in New York and Philadelphia followed with their own nonimportation pledges. The British responded by sending naval and military officials to Boston to enforce the Acts, this led to the Boston Massacre of 1770. Committees of correspondence were created in the colonies to rally opposition against the British and their policies. This was in response to the appointed governors in Massachusets and New York which sought to create a group of pro-loyalist officials that would support Britianʻs mercantilist methods. The committees informed people of current events, their constitutional rights and urged them to be more politically active.

The Stamp Act

Britainʻs victory over its adversaries in the Seven Yearsʻ War was not without cost. A great toll of blood and treasure left them having financial difficulties, and measures such as the Stamp Act of 1765 were taken. It was an act which imposed a direct levy on the thirteen colonies, required that many printed materials in the colonies be produced on stamped paper produced in London, carrying an embossed revenue stamp. Everything from legal documents to playing cards and many other types of paper used throughout the colonies. The tax had to be paid with British currency, and not in colonial paper money.

The purpose of this tax was to pay for the British troops stationed in North America after the Seven Yearsʻ War. The issue here was that there was already a distaste towards the British from the part of the colonists. They argued that the French were not hostile towards them and had no intentions of invading their territories. It was the responsibility of the British back home in London to provide for these surplus troops. It was an insult to the colonists, seeing as they were being taxed without their consent and was in violation of their rights as Englishmen.

The slogan “No taxation without representation” resonated throughout the colonies and its assemblies which sent petitions and protested. The most politically active citizens of colonial society were the ones most affected by this act (newspaper printers, students, attorneys, and judges), and mobilized popular opposition through their means.  In October 1765, delegates from the colonies convened in New York City at the Stamp Act Congress, where they drew up formal petitions to the British Parliament and to King George III to repeal the act. In March 1766, the Stamp Act was repealed. But the stage for the American Revolution had already been set.

The Seven Yearsʻ War

The European powers of Britain and France have had a long-standing historical rivalry with each other, and things would not change even at the beginning of a new era in the Americas. Conflict arose between the two countries due to territorial disputes resulted from them wanting to expand their sphere of influence over the frontier regions. one of the borders between French and British possessions was not well defined, and one disputed territory was the upper Ohio River Valley. The French constructed a number of forts in this region to attempt to strengthen their hold on the territory. This was seen as an intrusion by the British, and colonial militia forces led by lieutenant colonel George Washington attempted to expel the French in 1754 from the aforementioned territories. The attacks failed, and once the news reached Britain it was already too late. This led to this distant frontier scrimmage into becoming the first global war in the history of man. The war extended throughout the Americas, Africa, and Asia because of the French, Spanish and British colonies found there. Tribes of Native Americans sided with different factions in the conflict as a way of engaging rival tribes or strengthening their position. Spain and France along with tribes of native Americans were allied against the British, but British naval strength and Spanish ineffectiveness led to British success. British forces seized French Caribbean islands, Spanish Cuba, and the Philippines. Fighting in Europe ended after a failed Spanish invasion of British ally Portugal. By 1763, French and Spanish diplomats began to seek peace. In the resulting Treaty of Paris (1763), Great Britain secured significant territorial gains, including all French territory east of the Mississippi river, as well as Spanish Florida, although the treaty returned Cuba to Spain.

This was all a result of mercantilist greed pushed by the European powers that sought to dominate and monopolize the trading of furs in North-eastern North America. This wasnʻt something the British colonists were fond of, seeing as they were already fed up with the British regulations and stranglehold over their lives, this only led to more distaste towards them. Even though Washington and the militia attacked the French forts in 1754, the war officially started in 1756, and the peace treaty that resolved it was signed in 1763. It is also called the French-Indian War due to the Native American involvement with the French against the British.

How important do you think the Navigation Acts were in solidifying anti-British sentiment in the North American colonies?

The Navigation Acts were a set of English Laws imposed upon the colonies that regulated commerce between other countries and its own colonies. These laws were enacted in 1651, reenacted and broadened in 1660 and further developed and tightened by the Navigation Acts of 1663, 1673, and 1696. Additional changes and subsequent amendments were added, along with changes of staff and enforcement methods. These laws limited the colonists to only be able to trade with the British Empire, only use English ships and required the employment of English and colonial mariners for three-quarters of the crews, including East India Company ships. The system would develop with the colonies supplying raw materials for British industry, and in exchange for this guaranteed market, the colonies would purchase manufactured goods from or through Britain. This led to a growing anti-British sentiment amongst the colonists and would hinder growth for small businesses inside the colony. The colonies were seen more as a source of revenue for the empire rather than a territory with its own private citizens. The colonies were supplying wealth to mainland Britain due to the devastation of the 80 years’ war. The Navigation Acts required all of a colony’s imports to be either bought from Britain or resold by British merchants in Britain, no matter what price could be obtained elsewhere. The Molasses Act was enacted in 1696, and levied heavy heavy duties on the trade of sugar from the French West Indies to the American colonies, forcing the colonists to buy the more expensive sugar from the British West Indies instead. A black market developed and the British tried controlling the flow of contraband, but this proved useless and only helped grow the resentment of colonists towards the British.

The Mayflower Compact: What aspects of later American political values do you see in it?

The Mayflower compact was a pivotal document in American colonial history. It was an early, successful attempt at democracy that would pave the way for the colonists to become independent later on and eventually create the United States of America. This document gave the colonists the freedom to create their own Christian society with their rules, laws, and ordinances, in so long as they remained loyal subjects to King James. The compact was created as a means to quell dissension amongst the newly arrived colonists, as they landed in Massachusetts and not Virginia, they were outside Virginia Company territory and not subjected to the laws. This led to people ignoring leadership and having an individualistic attitude, seeing as there was no government in this untamed land. On November 11, 1620, 41 adult male colonists, including two indentured servants, signed the Mayflower Compact, although it wasn’t called that at the time. The Mayflower Compact was important because it was the first document to establish self-government in the New World. It remained active until 1691 when Plymouth Colony became part of Massachusetts Bay Colony.

Similarities such as self-governance of different states inside the union are similar to that of colonial self-government during that time. That the colony would set their own laws in accordance to what they thought just as long as they obeyed a centralized authority (In their case King James, in ours the Federal Government). This document was to be the bedrock of future societies, with the notion of creating a political community founded around a central document.

 

Do you think slavery would have been as widely used in the British Empire if King Charles and King James had not benefitted financially from the Royal African Company? Why or why not?

The mercantilist European powers of the time were in constant competition with each other, as they were trying to amass the largest sum of wealth in the shortest time possible. The slave trade was a lucrative business, seeing how slaves were very expensive and were high in demand in most of the Americas, it would make sense that the British made an entire company out of slave trading. Cash crops such as tobacco and sugarcane required extensive and arduous manual labor, and West African slaves proved to be fit for the job. The Portuguese were the main slave traders before the British, and they certainly wouldnʻt let a foreign power sell slaves to their colonies or to any other potential buyers. Mercantilism is basically nationalist capitalism with the government regulating and imposing policies that would benefit the state and its power at the expense of other nations. Why buy slaves from a foreign company when you can create your own company of slave trading and gain a profit from filling the demand yourself? If there hadnʻt been a demand for commodities such as tobacco and sugarcane, then it would have been very unlikely for slavery in the New World to ever exist (at least African slavery). For the governments of the time, it wasnʻt a question of morality, but rather a question of how much money they could make out of something.

French and Dutch exploration in the New World

Exploration in the Americas and incentives to colonize and extract resources from these newly-found territories extended far beyond the squabble to see who could have as much gold & silver as possible. The Spanish, the Dutch, and the French had differences in faith and geopolitical goals in the New World. The Spanish conquered and enslaved, whereas the French cooperated and set trading agreements with native tribes. The Dutch had a rivalry with Spain, as they were Calvinists and not Catholics, and Spain refused to even view Holland as a separate state up until almost half a century after its establishment.

Spain controlled most of the territories in Central and South America, along with some islands in the Caribbean. North America was still uncharted territories, as far as the Northeast was concerned, and this is where the French moved forth their approach. Figures such as Samuel de Champlain and Jacques Cartier claimed northern North America for France, naming the area around the St. Lawrence River New France. Great strides for French exploration of the New World were made. De Champlain explored the Caribbean in 1601 and the coast of New England in 1603 before traveling farther north, and in 1608 he founded Quebec. Cooperation between the French and Indian tribes followed suit, as it was more efficient to trade with the Natives and pay them to hunt for pelts than for the French to do it themselves. The French also expanded south, after Spain had weakened their hold in the Caribbean, they seized Guadeloupe and Martinique for themselves. This led to the French entering the market of sugar and tobacco, establishing plantations in both of these islands.

By the start of the 17th century, the Dutch had at their disposal two large trading corporations that they would use to play a part in the colonization of the New World. the Dutch East India Company, chartered in 1602 to trade in Asia, and the Dutch West India Company, established in 1621 to colonize and trade in the Americas. Henry Hudson was employed by the latter, and thanks to him the Dutch figured out that the territories of the Northeast had enough room and resources such as beaver pelts to set up and maintain colonies. The Dutch named their colony New Netherlands, and it served as a fur-trading outpost for the expanding and powerful Dutch West India Company. They expanded in the area to create other trading posts, where their exchange with local Algonquian and Iroquois peoples brought the Dutch and native peoples into an alliance. Amsterdam soon became the trade hub for all the Atlantic World.

The Columbian Exchange

After 1492, the discovery of the island of Hispaniola by Columbus would serve as a benchmark for further European colonization. New and uncharted land, with great weather and even greater wealth, would bring everyone from the Portuguese to the Dutch to settle in the new world. The Europeans brought with them grapes, peaches, apples, honeybees, horses, chickens, cattle and so forth. They then would trade with the natives to obtain things such as maize, potatoes, sweet potatoes, and manioc which would prove to enrich their diets.

While this was all groundbreaking, the quest for gold & silver was the main priority. The reason being that the mercantilist mindset of the time thought that there was a finite amount of resources in the world, and nation states would do well to obtain and hoard these resources before anyone else does. This meant that the government controlled the economic activity of individuals, from how much they could produce of something to how much they would be able to export. After colonization, the extraction of gold and silver would follow, and if possible multiple streams of income would be set up such as sugar cane or tobacco plantations. These resources would then be sent back to mainland Europe, and in return, Europe would provide all the necessary items for the sustainment of the colony. The increased production & demand for tobacco and refined sugar led to increased demand and transportation of African slaves to the new world, and the enslavement of groups of native people especially in the Caribbean and South America.

The Europeans also brought with them various diseases such as plague, chicken pox, influenza, measles, scarlet fever, smallpox, tuberculosis, and syphilis. Europeans have always lived near animals, and the cities were very unsanitized and cramped up spaces where outbreaks of these diseases were far too common. The natives of the Americas had never been exposed to all of these diseases, which led to entire peoples being wiped out or most of the population dying out. Eventually, Europeans would look for ways to research new medicines in the Americas and record new species of plants. Tools such as guns would be something sought after by the natives as much as horses. This led to over-hunting and the extinction of species such as beavers in the Northeastern parts of the United States. With their loss came the loss of beaver ponds, which had served as habitats for fish as well as water sources for deer, moose, and other animals. Pigs were allowed to forage and consume the foods on which deer and other indigenous species depended, resulting in scarcity of the game native peoples had traditionally hunted.

Private property was introduced and colonized land interfered with the seasonal change of lifestyle that was normal for certain tribes. Places that they took advantage of for their natural resources at different times of the year were suddenly off-limits to them. The Europeans had a private-property mindset while the Natives believed that the land was for everyone.

How did the Crusades influence European colonization projects?

The Crusades were a reaction to Muslim expansionism in the West and Eastern parts of Europe. They counter-attacked by moving into their territory, conquering Jerusalem and the surrounding territory. This increased maritime trade and Europeans had a taste of the various spices, porcelain, silk and others that created great demand in Western Europe. The road which merchants traveled to transport the goods was coined ‘the Silk Road’, and was dangerous, slow and unprofitable to traves. Muslims controlled the flow of goods coming in and out, taxing the transactions, and bandits often ambushed caravans.

This led to Europeans attempting to find alternative water routes to the exotic and wealthy spice islands which were modern-day Indonesia, whose location was purposefully kept secret by Muslim rulers. The lure of profit was so great that explorers sought out new trade routes and eliminate the Muslim middlemen. Meanwhile, the Portuguese were already colonizing portions of Western Africa, and Spain was right behind them trying to beat them in the colonial game. Portugal was in an aggressive expansion across the Atlantic, but Spain had an ace up their sleeve, Cristopher Columbus.

As you may know, Columbus had thought he reached the land European explorers had been seeking for so long. This opened a vast array of opportunities for colonialism and Spain seized it as fast as they could. Natural resources such as Gold that was abundant in the Americas were prioritized and brought back to Spain. This created great inflation and actually did a lot of long-term harm to Spain’s economy since there was an over-abundance of gold and not enough economic activity.